Who started this crap??

[cone]

What can I say to that? When you start down from the forties you start down more than 100 nm back from the airport. Even more if you're descending into icing conditions. I'm not going to slow to circuit speeds that far back! The rules only limit you to 250 knots below 10,000 in the vicinity of a MF airport. (Although on an IFR approach we'll slow it back to about 180 within 10 miles and 140 just before the FAF.)

Just buggin you dude. There's also a caveat in the speed restrictions that allow for aircraft operating restrictions (ie if its nots going to be safe to go slow don't), so you'll see a lot of fast jets exceeding the standard speeds (although we try when we can).

[Hedley]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... htm#602_32

says:

CAR 602.32 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no person shall operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet ASL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots.

(2) No person shall operate an aircraft below 3,000 feet AGL within 10 nautical miles of a controlled airport at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots unless authorized to do so in an air traffic control clearance.

(3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2), a person may operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed greater than the airspeeds referred to in subsections (1) and (2) where the aircraft is being operated on departure or in accordance with a special flight operations certificate - special aviation event issued pursuant to section 603.02.

(4) Where the minimum safe speed for the flight configuration of an aircraft is greater than the speed referred to in subsection (1) or (2), the aircraft shall be operated at the minimum safe speed.

But the CARs also say:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... bpart2.htm

CAR 102.01 These Regulations do not apply in respect of:

(a) military aircraft of Her Majesty in right of Canada when they are being manoeuvred under the authority of the Minister of National Defence;

So cone, why would you care about the civilian airspeed limitiations? They don't apply to you.

[cone]

We have a document very similar to the CARs, a lot of it is basically the same rules verbatum with some small changes (not always requiring an ifr alternate, etc). Our rules read more or less the same as yours for this section. That second section of the CARs gives our commanders the authority to make exceptions to the rules, eg for real world ops.

[Disco Stu]

Interesting point Hedley. The CARS do say that the speed limit is in effect with 10 nms of a "controlled AIRPORT". A MF is an advisory frequency airport (not controlled), but it does fall within class D airspace (controlled). We may have to sick the lawyers out there on this one.

Nimbo

There is nothing to leave to the lawyers. If you don't know the difference between controlled airspace, and a controlled airport, you shouldn't be flying.

This is basic CARs stuff guys. Private licence type stuff.

[Flying Nutcracker]

To clarify this you simply go to RAC 4.5.1:

"An Uncontrolled Aerodrome is an aerodrome without a control tower, or one where the tower is not in operation."

No need for the lawyers on this one!

But do you notice the different "name" in the RAC and the CARs? The CARs will say "Airport", and the RAC says "Aerodrome". Now what happened to the distinct difference between a civilian airport and a military aerodrome?

[Hedley]

CAR 101.01(1) says:

"airport" - means an aerodrome in respect of which an airport certificate issued under Subpart 2 of Part III is in force

But I still suspect that if you went to the Tribunal on this, you'd lose. The transport lawyer (who likely won't have a private pilot's licence, btw) would argue that the controlled airspace around the MF airport would make it a "controlled airport".

And the Tribunal judge (member) would almost certainly agree with Transport.

I once had a Tribunal member who was so dumb, he didn't know what flight visibility was. CAR 101.01 says:

"flight visibility" - means the visibility forward from the cockpit of an aircraft in flight

The Transport lawyer, who wasn't a pilot, argued that during a loop, when I was pointing straight down, because I was below 18,000 feet, I must have had less then the 3 miles flight visibility (forward from the cockpit) required to perform aerobatics as per CAR 602.27 (!)

The Tribunal member agreed with the Transport lawyer. I believe that this precedent had the effect of outlawing all aerobatics and airshows in Canada, at least those conducted below 18,000 feet AGL.

Good luck on explaining the subtle nuances of "controlled airport" at the Tribunal, guys

[justplanecrazy]

(Time is short when you're going 10 miles a minute).

Dude you're going almost super going into an uncontrolled airfield?

What can I say to that? When you start down from the forties you start down more than 100 nm back from the airport. Even more if you're descending into icing conditions. I'm not going to slow to circuit speeds that far back! The rules only limit you to 250 knots below 10,000 in the vicinity of a MF airport. (Although on an IFR approach we'll slow it back to about 180 within 10 miles and 140 just before the FAF.)

Nimbo.

Nimbo, what the hell are you flying that goes 600kts and flys into uncontrolled airports???

We shouldn't be arguing controlled airport or not. Hell if you're doing 250kts when you hit 10,000 feet 50kts at 10 miles doesn't make much difference. That 10,000 relates to anywhere in Canada. I see WJA, ACA, bag runs etc. break these rules daily. It seems like its turned into a race right down to the runway and somebodies going to get burned. Guess what, there are no transponder aircraft flogging around all over under 10,000'. If you're doing 200kts and spot him a mile ahead, you have less than 20 seconds to assess which way he's going and avoid him. If you're doing 360kts like most pilots these days, you'll have 10 seconds. And that's only if you happen to be looking out the window. One of these days there's going to be a disaster and when the radar gets pulled and the speeds are published, you'll look like quite the jackass rather than a hero for saving a couple minutes.

Sorry for the side rant but these rules were put into place for good reason and there seems to be a real complacency regarding them lately.

[justplanecrazy]

But do you notice the different "name" in the RAC and the CARs? The CARs will say "Airport", and the RAC says "Aerodrome". Now what happened to the distinct difference between a civilian airport and a military aerodrome?

It's not a distinction between military and civilian. An aerodrome is any chunk of land or water used for taking off and landing. An airport is simply a certified aerodrome.

[nimbostratus]

Interesting point Hedley. The CARS do say that the speed limit is in effect with 10 nms of a "controlled AIRPORT". A MF is an advisory frequency airport (not controlled), but it does fall within class D airspace (controlled). We may have to sick the lawyers out there on this one.

Nimbo

There is nothing to leave to the lawyers. If you don't know the difference between controlled airspace, and a controlled airport, you shouldn't be flying.

This is basic CARs stuff guys. Private licence type stuff.

Disco Stu, I'm not 100% sure if you were agreeing with me or asking me to return my pilots license.
In any case, I am pretty sure I know what Class D airspace is and what a MF airport is.

In case there is any doubt here is a clip from our TC/AIM.

4.5.4 Mandatory Frequency

Transport Canada has designated a Mandatory Frequency (MF) for use at selected uncontrolled aerodromes, or aerodromes that are uncontrolled between certain hours. Aircraft operating within the area in which the MF is applicable (MF area), on the ground or in the air, shall be equipped with a functioning radio capable of maintaining two-way communication. Reporting procedures shall be followed, as specified in CARs 602.97 to 602.103 inclusive.

An MF area will be established at an aerodrome if the traffic volume and mix of aircraft traffic at that aerodrome is such that there would be a safety benefit derived from implementing MF procedures. There may or may not be a ground station in operation at the aerodrome for which the MF area has been established. When a ground station is in operation, for example, an FSS, an RCO through which RAAS is provided, a CARS, or an Approach UNICOM, then all aircraft reports that are required for operating within, and prior to entering an MF area, shall be directed to the ground station. However, when the ground station is not in operation, then all aircraft reports that are required for operating within and prior to entering an MF area shall be broadcast. The MF will normally be the frequency of the ground station which provides the air traffic advisory services for the aerodrome. For the aerodromes with an MF, the specific frequency, distance and altitude within which MF procedures apply will be published in the CFS.

Examples

1. MF—rdo 122.2 5 NM 3100 ASL

2. MF—UNICOM (AAU) ltd hrs O/T tfc 122.75 5 NM 3100 ASL



As you can see above, it delineates a MF as being used at uncontrolled aerodromes (not controlled airports). Therefore, seen as there is no mention of different speeds required in different types of airspace I can only assume that the speed limit order is based only on altitude and proximity to controlled airports.
Seen as a MF is an uncontrolled aerodrome, 250 knots below 10,000 feet is the only restriction.

Hope that clears up any confusion.

Nimbo

[Flying Nutcracker]

justplanecrazy Wrote:

Guess what, there are no transponder aircraft flogging around all over under 10,000'. If you're doing 200kts and spot him a mile ahead, you have less than 20 seconds to assess which way he's going and avoid him. If you're doing 360kts like most pilots these days, you'll have 10 seconds.

What are the odds you're going to run into something outside of 10 miles below 3000 when you're doing 250 kts??? I'd say even greater!

There's a rule saying we should contact MF/RDO at least 5 min prior to arrival and it begs the question... why? Because they can give us a heads up as to what the traffic situation is like, and, give themselves time to get their own situational awareness so they can give proper advisories. Now when you come screaming in at 250 knots you are fully aware of the traffic inside the MF and can pretty much only blame yourself for not slowing down and give other traffic a chance!

Which leads to the original issue in this thread, namely correct phraseology and terminology in your radiowork! I encourage everyone to read CAR 602.97, 602.98, 602.101, 602.102, and 602.103. If you guys could just stick to the written rules everything would be more efficient and safe around these uncontrolled aerodromes. In particular it would help the flight service guys and gals who have to sit and wait for longwinded pilots finishing their schpiel before they can convey the pertinent information to other traffic.

[/quote]

[Pratt X 3]

justplanecrazy said

I see WJA, ACA, bag runs etc. break these rules daily. It seems like its turned into a race right down to the runway and somebodies going to get burned.

and

One of these days there's going to be a disaster and when the radar gets pulled and the speeds are published, you'll look like quite the jackass rather than a hero for saving a couple minutes.

Sorry for the side rant but these rules were put into place for good reason and there seems to be a real complacency regarding them lately.

I take it you are a tower controller by your previous posts. And I assume you are making these observations based on the radar you have available in the tower. I hope you remember that the speeds on that display are GROUNDSPEEDS and not AIRSPEEDS as the rule is written. An aircraft flying at 5000 feet at 250 knots indicated is doing approximately 275 knots true plus the wind of say 25 knots gives you a groundspeed of 300 knots. I am sure you are aware of this but just how much are these "somebodies" exceeding the law? I don't think there are many bag run airplanes that can do more than 250 knots indicated at any altitude, let alone below 10000.

I'm curious what the update rate is on your radar display is. I had a tower controller at a major airport in Canada get a little upset because he thought we had blown a airspeed restriction (170 knots or less at the FAF). We were at the front of the line of arrivals and had a speed restriction (220 knots) that was quickly cancelled by the next controller (arrival) so we picked the speed back up to 250 knots. When the approach clearance was issued, we were given the previously mentioned 170 or less at the FAF restriction. We were light so we kept the speed up longer than the tower controller had anticipated, I guess, and began to slow to make the 170 or less restriction (we actually were 165 and slowing rapidly as we went past the FAF). The tower controller said we had a groundspeed of well over 200 knots and reminded us about the 170 or less restriction. At the time, we were at our REF speed and the GPS showed us doing 160 knots over the ground. No harm, no foul but I think the Radar update was a little slow.

[Pygmie]

The radars update quite fast (~4-6 seconds) but the mistake quite a few people make is that the Groundspeed, as well as climb/descent rates, heading indications, etc. on the radar are based on averages, not instants. Groundspeed is obtained by averaging out the last few position updates, so it will lag behind the actual aircraft speed by a noticable amount.

[justplanecrazy]

I take it you are a tower controller by your previous posts. And I assume you are making these observations based on the radar you have available in the tower. I hope you remember that the speeds on that display are GROUNDSPEEDS and not AIRSPEEDS as the rule is written. An aircraft flying at 5000 feet at 250 knots indicated is doing approximately 275 knots true plus the wind of say 25 knots gives you a groundspeed of 300 knots. I am sure you are aware of this but just how much are these "somebodies" exceeding the law? I don't think there are many bag run airplanes that can do more than 250 knots indicated at any altitude, let alone below 10000.

Actually I did take that into account and the aircraft I'm referring to are generally flying into the wind as they're on approach to the runway so they're indicated is often higher than their groundspeed. I've flown a C310 over 200kt's indicated in descent to make it to circuit altitude so I imagine it's not that hard to have a B1900 or SW4 over 200 or 250.

[North Aviator]

.

[North Aviator]

Thank you so much for that rant on radio calls!! Its nice to know someone else wants to lose it when they here that nonsense blather that eats up crutial radio time. I read the comments slamming this initial comment, and cant figure out why. Perhaps those people havent flown the Mcmurray-Mildred lake-Horizon corridor in the Fort Mac area...

Please people that read this keep your calls short and sweet, it may just well be your own life you save

[zzjayca]

I take it you are a tower controller by your previous posts. And I assume you are making these observations based on the radar you have available in the tower. I hope you remember that the speeds on that display are GROUNDSPEEDS and not AIRSPEEDS as the rule is written...

Don't worry, we can tell when Pilot's are cheating on their assigned speeds. It doesn't matter whether the speed is expressed as an indicated airspeed, true airspeed or Mach number. (We just can't prove it, YET) We can tell from other aircraft on the same route and at the same altitude and/or with wind readouts from the aircraft. It isn't hard to figure out the wind component once you have been working the sector for a few minutes. And yes, we do take into account the Radar processor's averaging of the data.

As for the GPS, if you are getting the civilian feed, our radar is much more accurate. Even if you are on the military feed, our radar is at least as accurate as it.

When pilot's cheat on assigned speeds, we just end up being more restrictive to make the plan work. So in the end, the pilot's who cheat screw themselves. Once everyone is on Mode S it is going to be much more difficult for you to not fly what ATC has assigned as we will have access to your FMS and autopilot settings.

[Pygmie]

zzjayca brought up a very good point. We do see aircraft cheat on their assigned speeds, but it doesn't really hurt us all that much. If an aircraft's not doing their assigned speed, there's probably a nice little 15-20 degree vector in their immediate future to gain the room the speed adjustment would have made. It's not hurting us, one way or another you're not going to get there any faster by cheating a little. . .

The other thing I love is when an aircraft is asked for their best rate of climb to X altitude, and seeing the rate of climb change not one bit, yet miraculously when the words "vectors for traffic" come out of my mouth a few minutes later the rate of climb jumps way up.

[Pratt X 3]

Thanks for the info guys. Just a couple of things, though.

...I imagine it's not that hard to have a B1900 or SW4 over 200 or 250.

Maybe over the 200 knot speed limit but I believe both the 1900 and the Metro have a VMO of 250 knots or less. Never flown them; maybe someone who has can confirm this.

We can tell from other aircraft on the same route and at the same altitude and/or with wind readouts from the aircraft. It isn't hard to figure out the wind component once you have been working the sector for a few minutes.

If only the winds aloft stayed exactly the same over even a short period of time. Add in the errors that the airspeed indicators have and you might think we are trying to pull a fast one over on you. I've seen 4 different indicated speeds at the same time between 2 airspeed indicators and the 2 FMS's, as much as 10 knots or so. Now compare a few aircraft and there could be differences even though everyone is flying the same indicated airspeed.

As for the GPS, if you are getting the civilian feed, our radar is much more accurate. Even if you are on the military feed, our radar is at least as accurate as it.

Even more accurate than when the box is showing an actual RNP of 0.03?

The other thing I love is when an aircraft is asked for their best rate of climb to X altitude, and seeing the rate of climb change not one bit, yet miraculously when the words "vectors for traffic" come out of my mouth a few minutes later the rate of climb jumps way up.

Might be the profile they are flying at the time. It might be the best the aircraft can do at the speed its flying at the time of the request. The best rate of climb speed might require a faster speed so the rate might not increase until that speed is attained. The "vectors for traffic" might just be a coincidence.

Now, I'm not defending pilots that break laws to try and save a couple of minutes. But I am trying to make an excuse for those of us that don't have the fancy glass screens and advanced autopilots that would make life easier. And if it doesn't fit the plan, feel free to give me alternate instructions. I get paid by the minute (not really, but it is all loggable time).

[justplanecrazy]

Thanks for the info guys. Just a couple of things, though.

Maybe over the 200 knot speed limit but I believe both the 1900 and the Metro have a VMO of 250 knots or less. Never flown them; maybe someone who has can confirm this.

If only the winds aloft stayed exactly the same over even a short period of time. Add in the errors that the airspeed indicators have and you might think we are trying to pull a fast one over on you. I've seen 4 different indicated speeds at the same time between 2 airspeed indicators and the 2 FMS's, as much as 10 knots or so. Now compare a few aircraft and there could be differences even though everyone is flying the same indicated airspeed.

I'm not sure on the exact speeds but I've seen a B1900 and SW4 grounding well over 250kts with a headwind. If a C310 is capable of 230kts VNE then I imagine a plane like this would have no problems doing more than 20kt's faster. We're not talking about 10kts difference where the winds aloft can cause continuous changes. We're talking about 100kts variance.

[zzjayca]

I usually ask the aircraft it's Mach Number or Indicated airspeed before assigning the restriction. It becomes very obvious the pilot is cheating when the aircraft says it's indicating a Mach of .80, I assign .76 and the ground speed only changes by 10kts.

As for winds aloft changing. I'm not talking 15-20 minutes since the preceding aircraft passed the area. If I'm sequencing for arrivals, the aircraft are usually only 2-3 minutes apart. There is no way the winds are changing that much in that amount of time.

[LastSamurai]

I'm not sure on the exact speeds but I've seen a B1900 and SW4 grounding well over 250kts with a headwind. If a C310 is capable of 230kts VNE then I imagine a plane like this would have no problems doing more than 20kt's faster. We're not talking about 10kts difference where the winds aloft can cause continuous changes. We're talking about 100kts variance.

SW4 has a Vmo of 248 kts. Sure they routinely ground well over 270 kts with an average tailwind...but thats just it...GROUNDSPEED! The airspeed order has to do with indicated airspeed and not groundspeed. Since Vmo and Vne speeds are indicated speeds, they wouldn't be breaking the 250 kt airspeed order.

LS

[lilfssister]

There's a rule saying we should contact MF/RDO at least 5 min prior to arrival and it begs the question... why? Because they can give us a heads up as to what the traffic situation is like, and, give themselves time to get their own situational awareness so they can give proper advisories. Now when you come screaming in at 250 knots you are fully aware of the traffic inside the MF and can pretty much only blame yourself for not slowing down and give other traffic a chance!

Which leads to the original issue in this thread, namely correct phraseology and terminology in your radiowork! I encourage everyone to read CAR 602.97, 602.98, 602.101, 602.102, and 602.103. If you guys could just stick to the written rules everything would be more efficient and safe around these uncontrolled aerodromes. In particular it would help the flight service guys and gals who have to sit and wait for longwinded pilots finishing their schpiel before they can convey the pertinent information to other traffic.

Great post FN!

[Cat Driver]

It used to be called airmanship Sis, but common sense will go a long way in aviation.

Flyingnutcracker seems to be one of the few here who has some.

I think phraseology when using the radio in aviation has more to do with habits being formed during the ego years and gets spread through the tribe like monkeys imitating each other.

There that otta make me popular in the tribe.

[Beacon Final]

El Comat Says:

Ok I've finally had it.....if I hear one more radio call that ends in "...any conflicting traffic please advise C-GABC on 126.7 and 122.2, Hicksville" I think I'm gonna go crazy. Before we get into why it drives me crazy.....

If hes here... whos running hell?

Another quote from National Lampoon's Van Wilder you should take to heart;

"you shouldn't take life too seriously.... you will never get out alive"


If your this high strung over this, I would not want to fly with you.... or near you. And because your in the NWO does not make you gods gift to aviation in Canada.



Beacon Final

[Missed_Approach]

Obviously if I'm conflicting with you I'm gonna speak up and do what I can so that we don't hit each other. Oh, and telling people that you're on 126.7 and 122.8 is pretty dumb, cuz if they can hear you, there's a pretty good chance they know what frequency you're on, and if they can't hear you, there's a good chance they aren't on your frequency at all.

What if you have more than one comm in your aircraft and are monitoring two different frequencies..It helps to know which frequency you just heard a potential conflicting aircraft broadcast on....Just a thought[/quote]


Done, argument should have ended there.